Friday, June 26, 2015

Inspector General: Millions Wasted in Private Prison Contract

Jun 23, 2015

WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley is calling on the Bureau of Prisons to explain how approximately $2 million in questionable spending was allowed in one of its largest prison management contracts. A recent Justice Department Inspector General audit of a Bureau contract for management of the Reeves County Detention Center uncovered that the Bureau improperly paid $1.95 million in fringe benefits at the contractor’s request.

The inspector general was reviewing the Bureau’s contract with Reeves County, Texas, and its subcontractors for compliance with terms relating to billing and staffing requirements as well as oversight and monitoring. Both the Bureau’s and the contractor’s failure to understand the applicable law led to the improper use of funds, according to the inspector general’s audit. The audit further determined that the Bureau should reduce the monthly payout to the contractor by $41,088 to prevent additional waste of $945,024 throughout the remainder of the contract.

The improper spending was compounded by findings that the prison consistently failed to meet minimum contractual standards and received too many notices of concern. Further, one of the subcontractors, the GEO Group, did not adequately respond to the inspector general’s inquiries. In a letter to the Bureau, Grassley is asking for a detailed explanation of its oversight practices as well as whether the Bureau has taken steps to remedy the concerns raised by the inspector general’s audit.

All writings that comply with our mission and goal will be considered for publication on our Web site and/or blog. However, you should know that submission of an article or essay does not guarantee publication.Our aim is to provide complete, accurate, and timely commentary on the Peltier case. Authors agree, therefore, that Friends of Peltier will make revisions we deem necessary prior to publication—in particular to ensure accuracy. Submissions also are subject to a copyedit to ensure overall quality, i.e., to correct errors in spelling, grammar, and punctuation.We insist on certain standards being met. We offer this Code of Ethics for your consideration.We also accept creative writings, e.g., poetry, which will be published after a simple copyedit, as necessary. Otherwise, literary art will be published as submitted.No matter the type of submission, the author retains copyright and our publishing rights are non-exclusive. We do, however, retain the copyright on the compilation of writings on our Web site and blog. In addition, our Web site and blog are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License.Reproduction here of published material constitutes a 'fair use' of copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.

Disclaimer

Postings to this blog are made for the purpose of information dissemination. Views expressed may not reflect the views of either Leonard Peltier or of "Friends of Peltier," and posting of information doesn't imply endorsement.

Friends of Peltier was founded in the United States in early 2007 and is an independent international coalition in support of Leonard Peltier and his freedom. We wholeheartedly seek harmony, cohesion—solidarity, not discord. All persons of good heart who wish to work towards the freedom of Leonard Peltier are welcome in our circle.

NOTE: If you receive email correspondence from Friends of Peltier, it's due to the fact that you registered for our mailing list at some time since its inception in 2007. It is a double opt-in list and therefore your registration can not have happened by error or have been initiated by anyone else, i.e., our contacts with you do not constitute spam. You are, however, welcome to unsubscribe from our list at any time.